The jurisdiction of the Special Court under the UAPA and the impact of initial irregularities on the trial were the central legal points established in the judgment.

JUDGMENT

1. The petitioners have assailed the orders passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Paschim Medinipur on 9th August, 2023, 17th August, 2023 and 28th August, 2023 in connection with sessions trial no. 11(9) of 2011 under sections 121/121A/122/124A/302 read with section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, section 16 (1) (a)/16(1)(b)/18/38/39 of The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 under section 3/4 of the Explosive Substances Act and under section 25(I) (b) of the Arms Act.

2. Written complaint was lodged against the petitioners and others before Binpur Police Station which was registered as Binpur Police Station case no.12 dated 15th February, 2010 under sections 147/ 148 /149 / 186/302/333/353/326/307/120B/121/121A/122/122A/124A/435/436 /427/379 of the Indian Penal Code, under sections 25/27//35 of the Arms Act, under section 3/4 of the Explosive Substances Act and under section 9(B) of the Explosives Act. Investigation was taken up by the CID, West Bengal and the petitioners were arrested and produced before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhargram who remanded the petitioners/accused to custody from time to time. The Investigating Officer filed an application before the Magistrate seeking addition of section 16(1) (a)/16(1)(b)/18/20/38/39 of the UAPA which was allowed by an order passed on 3rd May, 2010. Charge sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer on 21st May, 2010 and the Learned ACJM took cognizance of offences under the Indian Penal Code. The Learned ACJM refrained from taking cognizance of the offence under the UAPA for want of proper sanction from the competent authority. Such sanction was subsequently granted by the State Government following which supplementary charge sheets submitted by the Investigating Officer were taken cognizance of. The case was committed to the Learned Sessions Judge, Pashchim Medinipur by the Learned ACJM and the Learned Sessions Judge took cognizance by an order passed on 9th September, 2011 and transferred the case to the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Paschim Medinipur for disposal, by an order passed on 24th November, 2011.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that since the offences alleged under the UAPA fall within the category of scheduled offences under section 2(g) of The National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, the Learned ACJM had no authority to deal with the matter or remand the accused-petitioners to custody. The accused ought to have been produced before the Special Court and in absence of a Special Court, the Court of Sessions who has been authorised to exercise all powers and jurisdiction of the Special Court in terms of section 22(3) of the NIA Act. The Learned Sessions Judge erred in law in transferring the case to the Learned Additional Sessions Judge for trial since such delegation of power is not sanctioned by the NIA Act. Such grievance was ventilated by the petitioners before the Learned ADJ who, by the orders impugned, turned down the prayer of the petitioners. Admittedly trial of the case is on the verge of conclusion and argument is being heard.

4. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the authorities in Bikramjeet Singh v/s. State of Punjab reported in (2020) 10 SCC 616, a judgment of an Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court passed on 1st December, 2022 in CRM (DB) 3590/2022 and a judgment of a coordinate Bench of this Court dated 11th May, 2023 in CRR 3180 of 2022.

5. Learned counsel for the State has placed reliance on the authority in Naser Bin Abu Bakr Yafai v/s State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2022) 2 SCC (Cri) 527 and has submitted that since there is no designated Special Court for trial of offences under the UAPA, the Court of Sessions is the Court of first instance and is empowered to take cognizance without the case being committed to it and try any case involving any scheduled offence. The Court of Sessions includes a Court presided over by the Additio